Posted without comment https://twitter.com/chemicalmishap/status/1273159524791259137?s=21
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:15 AM Steve Timko <steveti...@gmail.com> wrote: > This was a lively talk with Bill Burr about the entertainment business and > Hollywood accounting. > > https://youtu.be/eGsB7hE_cFo > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020, 7:21 AM Adam Bowie <a...@adambowie.co.uk> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 3:21 PM Tom Wolper <twol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> I don't get why Spotify is making this deal because they aren't content >>> originators and, unlike Stern and SiriusXM, I don't see how it will sell >>> subscriptions. Still, in a world where NBC signed Megyn Kelly for $65 >>> million with all of her baggage, this may not be such a shocking deal. >>> >>> >> I think there's a two-part reason for this. >> >> Firstly, and most straightforwardly, Spotify gets a massive new audience. >> For reasons that escape me (although that Atlantic article gives a good >> explanation), millions listen. I assume a decent number of people will >> continue to listen on the Spotify app even if they don't subscribe. From my >> understanding Spotify isn't putting this behind a paywall, just forcing you >> to use the app. But even if they don't get any new subscriptions at all, >> Spotify can better monetise that audience than many others because they >> have so much data on their users. They know your demographics (you tell >> them when you sign up); they know when, where and how much people are >> listening; they know all kinds of things that *regular* podcast platforms >> don't know - podcast data is notoriously limited without all the tracking >> data that most digital advertisers have on you. So Spotify can offer more >> details to advertisers and more efficiently sell the podcast. Reports seem >> to suggest that what Rogan gets paid will depend on hitting targets. So on >> a purely commercial level, this may make sense for Spotify for those >> reasons alone. >> >> But Spotify is also taking on the podcast industry. Their second motive >> is to become closer to the default podcast platform. That helps their >> overall business model - if you're listening to "free" podcasts, you're not >> listening to "expensive" music. Somewhere around 60-65% of podcast >> listening is currently via Apple podcasts despite Apple having 50% market >> share of phones in the US, and less across the rest of the world. Spotify >> wants in on that, and unlike Apple who hasn't been active in an area they >> dominate, Spotify is spending a lot becoming a very solid #2. Exclusives >> become a differentiator for them. >> >> I'm not a massive fan of this direction. If your podcast is not in my >> podcast app of choice (Pocket Casts since you asked), I'm >> significantly less likely to hear it. But I can understand the business >> logic of it from Spotify's perspective. Up until now, I don't think that >> there have been as many killer podcasts as podcasts businesses need. Many >> podcasts are "replaceable." We've seen Luminary try this, with their >> exclusive range of podcasts, but reports suggest that they're hemorrhaging >> money. In part this is because you can probably find a sufficiently good >> replacement for any podcast that moved behind the paywall, or otherwise >> never heard their exclusives anyway. Serial might be an example of a killer >> podcast. Or maybe The Daily. Something people would change behaviours to >> still get access to. Even then, I'm not sure that the NYT would put The >> Daily behind a subscription paywall when it's: a) profitable right now with >> their listening figures, and b) acts a massive promotional tool to drive >> those NYT subscriptions. They spread that messaging every single episode! >> >> Today there are more than 1,000,000 podcast series on iTunes. If my >> favourite tech podcast moved behind a paywall, I might be a bit bummed, but >> I could probably find a suitable replacement. Spotify is gambling that >> Rogan's fans will follow him and there aren't a bunch of others like him - >> or at least as "good" as what he does. It might work for him and Spotify. >> But who else would it work for? I'm not sure. >> >> Disclaimer: I've never listened to him. I can't say that three podcasts >> by *anyone* appeal to me. I only recently found out that he was the >> presenter of Fear Factor which we did get in the UK. But I always found him >> the most obnoxious thing on that, and that's saying something. Oh, and any >> podcast that ever had or has Alex Jones on it, for any reason whatsoever, >> is not a podcast I'm ever going to listen to. >> >> >> >> Adam >> >>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDqcJPunqwBSr5CFENT6Gbmuf-60QHMHAkAwr3FOzF1_Q%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDqcJPunqwBSr5CFENT6Gbmuf-60QHMHAkAwr3FOzF1_Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAH5J8yyWtW-70cn1uxm%2BtaVHcGrcgSLAFgoKaLxJ9MVFytYZSA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAH5J8yyWtW-70cn1uxm%2BtaVHcGrcgSLAFgoKaLxJ9MVFytYZSA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4A9Pkfa7%3DQ%3DBzJdcmgLiHrYQu3y%2BbcvnXaiuwn1maHxUw%40mail.gmail.com.
